Ratings25
Average rating3.9
I can't decide what to think about this book.
It's highly-regarded by authors like Stephen King.
Stanley Kubrick referred to “Killer” as “probably the most chilling and believable first-person story of a criminally warped mind I have ever encountered.”
The beginning of the book, in which Lou Ford “kills” with never-ending platitudes and an “aw shucks” outward demeanor made me think I was in for a treat. The idea of one of the most upstanding citizens of a small town being not what they seem is a great premise.
Yet, the rest of the book was just okay.
“Killer” felt incredibly rushed and needed a free more passes to make it a real classic.
On the positive side, it's sort of interesting to be inside the mind of a psychopath. But, I find it hard to believe that Lou Ford kept his “sickness” at bay despite being a sheriff's deputy. Could it be that he committed more crimes between his youth and the rash of crimes in his 29th year that he didn't remember? We do know that Lou obscures and tries to find justification for his violent acts, so the most horrendous sections of the books are relatively short and hazy.
I found a lot of the dialogue hard to follow (much more so than other noir/pulp fiction writers of the 30s-50s I've read previously). And, other than the first few chapters and the character of Conway, I didn't really hear a Texas flavor to anyone's speech.
I wonder if “Dexter” was influenced by this book at all.
At the end of the day, I can't sash this is a great book, but maybe I'd think differently if I first encountered the book in the 50s.